Please get consensus before making any large changes. BJ Talk 04:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
No, there is no consensus and we've been discussing this for months now. Any moves must be listed on WP:RM and follow the respective procedure. Thank you. Hús ö nd 05:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Please stop stripping these from articles. The tag is simply a organisational topic, not a judgment on the subject of the article. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I do believe you have now violated WP:3RR on Talk:Saddam Hussein. WOuld you please revert yourself? Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 00:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
For violating the
Wikipedia:Three-revert rule on
Talk:Saddam Hussein, I have blocked you for a period of 24 hours.
[1],
[2],
[3], and
[4]. You may contest this block by adding the code {{
unblock|reason here}}
below this message.
Spebi
01:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I would not waste any time arguing with an editor using an account that is only four days old and whose edits are mainly minor deletions and long arguments on talk pages. This editor is clearly a troll.-- Amban ( talk) 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I reverted your edit on Talk:Shining Path. This has already been discussed at Talk:Shining_Path#Totalitarianism. Feel free to state your opinions there! -- ElPeruano ( talk) 01:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
You are removing the word Totalitarianism from many articles. Please get cosnesus first before proceeding. Igor Berger ( talk) 01:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Please cease removing the tags you're stripping from dozens of talk pages. The speed you're doing these edits at is a concern, and your edit summary of "remove subjectively-applied pejorative term that can never be NPOV" suggests a point of view of your own. I would suggest discussing the removal of the tags at Wikipedia:WikiProject Totalitarianism prior to continuing your edits. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to ask you to stop removing articles from Wikiprojects. You are not, as you seem to believe, removing them from categories, which is a different thing altogether. A category is something that goes onto the article page (we call this the "Main" or "Article" namespace). Categories allow for the encyclopedia to be organized so that readers can more easily find information. There are policies governing whether an article can be included in categories, however: policies like WP:NPOV and WP:V. A Wikipedia:Wikiproject is a group of editors that have banded together, typically to edit a collection of related articles. They place a template typically at the top of an article talk page in order to mark that the article is within the scope of their Wikiproject. This is in the "talk" namespace, whose function is to improve the article, not to categorize pages in the same way that the article namespace does. Generally, there is no specific policy which applies to whether or not an article may be placed under the auspices of a Wikiproject: thus WP:NPOV and WP:V need not apply.
If you truly feel that Wikipedia:Wikiproject totalitarianism does not deserve a spot as a Wikiproject, then you can consider subjecting it to the deletion process. The village pump may also be a place to go if you wish to seek assistance. But deleting all of the articles from a Wikiproject by removing the template could be considered a form of disruption. As I see that you have been warned about this before, I suggest that you discuss this sort of thing in the future before implementing it. Thank you for your cooperation, Silly rabbit ( talk) 01:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
FYI: This topic was reported on WP:AIV; the discussion has been moved to WP:ANI. — ERcheck ( talk) 01:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Maglev Power ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
original unblock reason
Decline reason:
You did not provide a reason. However, it seems to me that despite other editors strongly objecting to your edits, you did not feel that their consensus was sufficient and continued to implement changes despite being warned not to do so. Please be sure to read up on our consensus article, and in the future, please try to discuss changes more democratically. — slakr\ talk / 02:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
For 24 hours. Your determined attempt to get your own way is disruptive and cannot be tolerated. Consensus is the way forward, but you seem to have rejected it. Accordingly, to prevent further short-term damage to the project, I have imposed this block and suggest that you talk this through on the appropriate project talk page. -- Rodhullandemu ( Talk) 02:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
About your last edits in the article, please do not remove referenced material. Imad marie ( talk) 19:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Please focus on the content and avoid attacking other editors in edit summaries and talk page discussion. Referring to other users as POV warrior and edits as outright censorship are not helpful in a colaborative work such as this. Please read WP:NPA and WP:Civility. Vsmith ( talk) 00:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to
attack other editors, as you did on
Al Gore and the environment. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Gamaliel (
talk)
01:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Will you be willing to cosign an RfC against Gamaliel for his/her reversions on Al Gore-related article? My edits have been steamrolled from the start, with little attention to the discussion on talk from Gamaliel. An RfC would be designed to generate community intervention against such abusive editing practices. Bancroft EIR ( talk) 03:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 21:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 23:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) ( talk) 08:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Please get consensus before making any large changes. BJ Talk 04:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
No, there is no consensus and we've been discussing this for months now. Any moves must be listed on WP:RM and follow the respective procedure. Thank you. Hús ö nd 05:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Please stop stripping these from articles. The tag is simply a organisational topic, not a judgment on the subject of the article. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I do believe you have now violated WP:3RR on Talk:Saddam Hussein. WOuld you please revert yourself? Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 00:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
For violating the
Wikipedia:Three-revert rule on
Talk:Saddam Hussein, I have blocked you for a period of 24 hours.
[1],
[2],
[3], and
[4]. You may contest this block by adding the code {{
unblock|reason here}}
below this message.
Spebi
01:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I would not waste any time arguing with an editor using an account that is only four days old and whose edits are mainly minor deletions and long arguments on talk pages. This editor is clearly a troll.-- Amban ( talk) 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I reverted your edit on Talk:Shining Path. This has already been discussed at Talk:Shining_Path#Totalitarianism. Feel free to state your opinions there! -- ElPeruano ( talk) 01:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
You are removing the word Totalitarianism from many articles. Please get cosnesus first before proceeding. Igor Berger ( talk) 01:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Please cease removing the tags you're stripping from dozens of talk pages. The speed you're doing these edits at is a concern, and your edit summary of "remove subjectively-applied pejorative term that can never be NPOV" suggests a point of view of your own. I would suggest discussing the removal of the tags at Wikipedia:WikiProject Totalitarianism prior to continuing your edits. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to ask you to stop removing articles from Wikiprojects. You are not, as you seem to believe, removing them from categories, which is a different thing altogether. A category is something that goes onto the article page (we call this the "Main" or "Article" namespace). Categories allow for the encyclopedia to be organized so that readers can more easily find information. There are policies governing whether an article can be included in categories, however: policies like WP:NPOV and WP:V. A Wikipedia:Wikiproject is a group of editors that have banded together, typically to edit a collection of related articles. They place a template typically at the top of an article talk page in order to mark that the article is within the scope of their Wikiproject. This is in the "talk" namespace, whose function is to improve the article, not to categorize pages in the same way that the article namespace does. Generally, there is no specific policy which applies to whether or not an article may be placed under the auspices of a Wikiproject: thus WP:NPOV and WP:V need not apply.
If you truly feel that Wikipedia:Wikiproject totalitarianism does not deserve a spot as a Wikiproject, then you can consider subjecting it to the deletion process. The village pump may also be a place to go if you wish to seek assistance. But deleting all of the articles from a Wikiproject by removing the template could be considered a form of disruption. As I see that you have been warned about this before, I suggest that you discuss this sort of thing in the future before implementing it. Thank you for your cooperation, Silly rabbit ( talk) 01:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
FYI: This topic was reported on WP:AIV; the discussion has been moved to WP:ANI. — ERcheck ( talk) 01:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Maglev Power ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
original unblock reason
Decline reason:
You did not provide a reason. However, it seems to me that despite other editors strongly objecting to your edits, you did not feel that their consensus was sufficient and continued to implement changes despite being warned not to do so. Please be sure to read up on our consensus article, and in the future, please try to discuss changes more democratically. — slakr\ talk / 02:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
For 24 hours. Your determined attempt to get your own way is disruptive and cannot be tolerated. Consensus is the way forward, but you seem to have rejected it. Accordingly, to prevent further short-term damage to the project, I have imposed this block and suggest that you talk this through on the appropriate project talk page. -- Rodhullandemu ( Talk) 02:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
About your last edits in the article, please do not remove referenced material. Imad marie ( talk) 19:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Please focus on the content and avoid attacking other editors in edit summaries and talk page discussion. Referring to other users as POV warrior and edits as outright censorship are not helpful in a colaborative work such as this. Please read WP:NPA and WP:Civility. Vsmith ( talk) 00:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to
attack other editors, as you did on
Al Gore and the environment. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Gamaliel (
talk)
01:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Will you be willing to cosign an RfC against Gamaliel for his/her reversions on Al Gore-related article? My edits have been steamrolled from the start, with little attention to the discussion on talk from Gamaliel. An RfC would be designed to generate community intervention against such abusive editing practices. Bancroft EIR ( talk) 03:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 21:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) ( talk) 23:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) ( talk) 08:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)